Clinical Research Papers:

Comparison on efficacy of radical prostatectomy versus external beam radiotherapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Linyan Chen, Qingfang Li, Yexiao Wang, Yiwen Zhang and Xuelei Ma _

PDF  |  HTML  |  How to cite

Oncotarget. 2017; 8:79854-79863. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.20078

Metrics: PDF 1459 views  |   HTML 2157 views  |   ?  


Linyan Chen1,*, Qingfang Li1, Yexiao Wang1, Yiwen Zhang1,* and Xuelei Ma1

1State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University and Collaborative Innovation Center, Chengdu, PR China

*Authors contributed equally to this work

Correspondence to:

Xuelei Ma, email: [email protected]

Yiwen Zhang, email: [email protected]

Keywords: prostate cancer, external beam radiotherapy, surgery, meta-analysis

Received: May 05, 2017     Accepted: July 26, 2017     Published: August 09, 2017


Since there was no consensus on treatment options of localized prostate cancer, a meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy of radical prostatectomy (RP) versus external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) concluding three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The search of eligible studies was performed on PubMed and Embase databases. The overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS) were compared by hazard ratio (HR) and odd ratios (OR). Twelve studies with 17137 patients were included. The pooled HR and 95% CI for OS, CSS and BDFS were 1.60 (1.44–1.79), 1.73 (1.34–2.24) and 0.65 (0.51–0.82), respectively. However, according to risk stratification, the HRs of CSS for low- to intermediate-risk patients were not significant. The 5-year and 10-year CSS reported significant OR and 95% CI of 1.96 (1.42–2.72) and 2.44 (1.33–4.48), except for 2-year CSS (P = 0.42). In conclusion, RP was generally associated with decreased risk of overall and cancer-specific mortality as well as better 5-year and 10-year OS and CSS. The EBRT was suggested to be a promising alternative option for low- to intermediate-risk patients. Large-scale prospective studies with risk stratification and adequate follow-up length were needed for further comprehensive comparison.

Creative Commons License All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
PII: 20078